- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Proof-of-Loss
Abstract
An alternative consensus algorithm to both proof-of-work and proof-of-stake, proof-of-loss addresses all their deficiencies, including the lack of an organic block size limit, the risks of mining centralization, and the "nothing at stake" problem.Author's Profile
Other Versions
No versions found
Links
PhilArchive
External links
(no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Through your library
- Only published works are available at libraries.
My notes
Similar books and articles
Information in propositional proofs and algorithmic proof search.Jan Krajíček - 2022 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 87 (2):852-869.
Proof in Mathematics: An Introduction.James Franklin - 1996 - Sydney, Australia: Quakers Hill Press.
A constructive proof of the Peter‐Weyl theorem.Thierry Coquand & Bas Spitters - 2005 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 51 (4):351-359.
Freedom, Consciousness, and Science: An Emergentist Response to the Challenge.Philip Clayton - 2009 - In Melville Y. Stewart (ed.), Science and Religion in Dialogue. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 985--998.
Where is the Gödel-Point Hiding: Gentzen’s Consistency Proof of 1936 and His Representation of Constructive Ordinals.Anna Horská - 2013 - Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Derivability in certain subsystems of the Logic of Proofs is-complete.Robert Milnikel - 2007 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 145 (3):223-239.
Case comment: Quantification of the ‘proof beyond reasonable doubt’ standard.James Franklin - 2005 - Law, Probability and Risk 6:159-165.
Analytics
Added to PP
2017-01-31
Downloads
422 (#65,617)
6 months
143 (#29,315)
2017-01-31
Downloads
422 (#65,617)
6 months
143 (#29,315)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-667477cd97-sfdq8 dc2